“Never be afraid to raise your voice for honesty and truth and compassion against injustice and lying and greed. If people all over the world... would do this, it would change the earth.”

- William Faulkner

COMMENT Writing a contrarian piece is never easy and this old sailor salutes Hafidz Baharom for writing such a piece about Bersih in these turbulent times.

Having been on the receiving end numerous times, I would like to say that freedom of speech is best defined when people speak up even though they understand they could be subjected to vitriol in spaces that (ironically) should encourage diverse and divergent views.

It is important that our supposedly free spaces are not dominated by a single voice and with the Umno regime’s threat to control the internet, it is vitally important that we, encourage and allow diversity of thought and respond in a rational manner, all which are anathema to Umno and their desire for hegemony but increasingly evident in those who claim they support free speech.

Having followed and mostly agreed with all of Hafidz’s comment pieces, I have to say that I believe his piece on Bersih misses the ball but more importantly, he raises interesting questions which he unfortunately addresses to the wrong power group.

Hafidz writes, “But the truth is, I am opposing this rally based on what I see now. Bersih is a nine-year-old coalition that lacks any form of depth or organisation.”

I find this kind of odd. This is like someone claiming that he is opposing democracy because mainstream political parties everywhere rarely deliver on what they claim to represent.

Bersih is merely the loudspeaker of diverse groups protesting in an organised manner. The principle here is the right of citizens to protest and not under which banner they are protesting under.

As I have written in many pieces, public displays of discontent are rare in the Malaysian political landscape. This has more to do with public apathy rather than anything this regime has done. People just did not care to voice their displeasure and instead were content to vote in the same bunch of kleptocrats for very selfish communal reasons.

Don’t stop the rhetoric

The dangerous idea of the Bersih rallies is that each time it is held, more diversity is introduced into our public spaces. The dangerous idea that large groups of people of different races, political and racial ideologies are congregating with a specific goal of demonstrating their discontent of the Umno status quo.

For a regime, whose agenda is always reminding people that Umno and Umno alone has the capability of maintaining law and order, this is an extremely dangerous idea.

Bersih is not a political party and its structure should be necessarily amorphous to reflect the diverse interests that support it. Of course, they have written papers, held talks and provided concrete ideas as to how to change the system.

These efforts are not as effective as it could be because most Malaysians don’t care to read or attend and communication is lost in the urban/rural disconnect that characterises Malaysian oppositional politics, but the reality is that the main goal is to organise and encourage the public in halting the rhetoric and engaging in public action.

If anything, Bersih should not stop the rhetoric and instead ratchet it up. It should remind those interested in such matters - and this should be anyone interested in the way how this country is being managed - to consider how not attending and sitting on the sidelines would affect the democratic future of this country.

They should continue advocating the idea that peaceful demonstrations of public discontent is the foundation of liberty and that everyone has the right - even those people whose views we disagree with - to use our public spaces to voice their discontent. Now you could argue that this is not the stated goal of Bersih but anyone familiar with their literature and public statements would realise that this has been the backbone of their rhetoric which so far has translated into action.

All Malaysians do is engage in rhetoric and mostly online. When they stop and engage in action, change has come. Having served this regime loyally for most of my professional career, I have seen this change first hand.

When Anwar Ibrahim, was ousted the resulting fallout was reflected in a certain segment of the Malay polity taking to the streets. This soon morphed into Malaysians regardless of race taking to the streets for various reasons under the Reformasi banner. Bersih gave shape to this dissatisfaction and oppositional politics was forever changed. Hindraf too played a part in transforming how citizens used their right to protest.

For a country like Malaysia whose citizens have always sought solace in pragmatism, the dangerous idea of taking it to the streets by joining peaceful demonstrations has radically changed how they cast their vote in the ballot box. This is why this regime fears such public displays of dissatisfaction and does their utmost to stifle free speech and control public spaces.

I would argue that reclaiming our public space, using our right to freedom speech and expression is hardly “symbolic action” and the benefits of exercising those rights and supporting Bersih has changed the political landscape of this country resulting in an opposition that has become mainstream instead of remaining in the wilderness.

Storming the barricades

This Bersih march is much more than about storming the barricades. I too opposed storming the barricades in the last Bersih march and wrote a piece about it. However, I understand that this is a natural consequence when oppositional forces by necessity have to work with political parties against a monolith regime.

What Bersih has to ensure is that opportunistic political parties curtail their rabble rousing and ensure to the best of their abilities, that people get what they signed up for. A peaceful protest. Having been to so many of these demonstrations, I can attest that generally Malaysians are well behaved and not prone to causing public mischief or at least that is the general sentiment of those who attend these rallies.

I am of the opinion that Hafidz is asking the right questions to the wrong people - Bersih. As I said, as a pressure group, Bersih has addressed in an academic and dare I say it, intellectual way the problems plaguing our electoral system.

However the people who should and can do something about it, are the people we elect (if one is an opposition supporter of course) - Pakatan Rakyat - and unfortunately they have not been proactive and organised in addressing the issues that Hafidz raises. There are numerous excuses for this but as someone who has attempted to raise those hard questions; I understand where Hafidz is coming from.

I do take exception to Hafidz asking Bersih for clarification as to what they would do with the funds raised under the guise of transparency by equating the situation with that of Umno’s supposed donations. This is disingenuous. Unless Hafidz can demonstrate that Bersih has a pattern of mismanaging their funding or lack of transparency, such a question is highly misleading.

Furthermore, such a question is best asked, after Bersih holds its rally. People have a right to know how their donations were managed and unlike this particular regime, I have no doubt Bersih will answers these questions, when asked.

Lastly, going out to the streets and protesting is a risky endeavour especially when the Umno establishment has hinted that violence is always possible. It is a risk that every citizen accepts for whatever reason he or she decided to show contempt for how this political party is running this country.

In this current climate, where Arabs give money to Umno to stop supposedly Jewish-backed political parties and as a reward for opposing IS (even though our prime minister slipped up said he supported them) going out on the streets is an action which is hardly symbolic. But don’t forget your T-shirts, kids.

S THAYAPARAN is Commander (Rtd) of the Royal Malaysian Navy.